I’d really like to solicit your feedback on this topic.
After two and a half years of waiting, today I received a letter through the contracting company L. from their customer - the huge, secretive IC one in Virginia. It is from their Medical Services Center where I did the urine sample, computer-based test, and conversation with the psychiatrist in mid-January towards the end of the whole investigation. All that was left after that was the adjudication step.
It states, “not eligible for a contracting position with us at this time. This decision is based on information provided to us by the applicant or was obtained during his initial processing. This cannot be appealed, and more information isn’t available. Please note this is not a security clearance denial, and you may re-apply again in 1 year for this sponsored position - the applicant should note on future SF-86 forms that this wasn’t a denial of clearance.”
I have no mental illness, no drug use whatsoever, and had a very pleasant and positive experience with their medical team on-site in Januaury. However, it seems like a medical qualification, seeing as it comes from their Medical Services Center.
Has anyone encountered a similar scenario with their medical/psychological processing? The agency won’t say anything, so I don’t know what problem to address if I re-apply in a year…
I have failed a psychological evaluation before, no idea why, all I can do is speculate. Looking back, I’m glad I did not get that job after all. Who knows about some of these psych evals, I swear they just make up reasons to deny people. I have no clue. I am sure it is probably agency specific.
Update: One (unverified) opinion I got says the following: “unofficial suitability (fitness) action. An official denial is a long drawn out process that allows appeals and other steps so employers more often use the unofficial route. Not much you can do. Just keep applying elsewhere.”
Hi! I received exactly the same note today! Same contractor, same agency. No idea what that means. My process went relatively smoothly (1 year almost exactly from investigation to adjudication). It really is devastating news and I’m still working with a few contacts I have to figure out what it is all about.
Hi, i’d like to connect further if you wish to discuss it more. I’m curious about your experience, and am sorry you were brushed off like that, too.
My note came from their Office of Medical Services, so I wonder what that could mean. If it’s genuine lack of suitability/fitness, why would the medical office send such a note? Is it character/personality mismatch? I.e., if a person doesn’t have any drug consumption or mental issues whatsoever, could it just be a personality mismatch? I.e., could they be searching for a particular type? I could understand that if it were for the clandestine service, but what type of special character must one possess to be a contractor linguist?! Preposterous. It’s like a Kafka novel…
Yeah, I absolutely agree and share your frustration. I got some more insight from people familiar with the organization. Maybe we could take it off this forum though, like you said. Any suggestion how we could connect?
Alas, the majority of us don’t have a clearance, and we find it inordinately difficult to penetrate that exclusive club. Talk about a tiny circle! Pledging that fraternity has some exalted requirements these days.
Getting a positive adjudication for a clearance, passing a psych evaluation, and doing a poly are all vastly different. I’ve had several investigations over the years for different jobs at different levels and have always received positive adjudications. I’m not a fan of psych evals or polys due to the degree of subjectivity involved and the lack of checks and balances. Clearance investigations are set up with checks and balances to weed out biases, false testimony, and to present all mitigating information; Psych evals and polys do not. I failed a psych evaluation because the person did not like that I was take a medication as prescribed that “could” be used for a personality disorder even though in my case, that is not the reason it was prescribed. For my clearance, the medication is fine, I am taking it as prescribed. I have just made the personal decision that I don’t want to apply to a position that requires a psych evaluation or poly because I don’t want to deal with the stress and nonsense. A T5 is high enough.
I took a psych eval for one agency and it seemed like an in-depth personality inventory.
I took a psych eval for a different agency and it was more like, are you in the middle of a psychotic episode right now? As in, anything less than that is good to go.
Another great argument against psych evals for security clearances is the fact that I seem to have passed several of them
It’s clearly a thing from this agency…there was literally a SCOTUS case with a letter/email like this from the agency cited in one of the appeals leading up to SCOTUS last month. It was an EEO case after a denial following the mental health evaluation. It was dismissed By SCOTUS.
Mowery vs. NGA and William Burns (Director of CIA)
That almost happened to me with that very same agency. “Luckily”, the doctor who saw my meds asked her husband , who is also a doctor at agency, about it since he worked at VA and he told her, Yes, that medicine is also used for sleep issues and not just for more severe psych issues. You would think they would do more research if that came up to find that out. In my case it was simple but i am SURE that in most cases they don’t do their due diligence because most doctors “know it all”…
